My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GREAT WESTERN RECLAMATION, INC.1971 (2)
Clerk
>
Contracts / Agreements
>
TRASH CONTRACTS & MISC. FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS
>
TRASH / SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
>
GREAT WESTERN RECLAMATION
>
GREAT WESTERN RECLAMATION, INC.1971 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2017 8:46:39 AM
Creation date
2/28/2017 8:46:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Contracts
Company Name
GREAT WESTERN RECLAMATION, INC.
Agency
Public Works
Council Approval Date
6/21/1971
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Tfl : CITY Of SWITfi <br /> CALIFORNIA <br /> June 17, 1971 Please address replies to: <br /> MEMO TO: City Council <br /> FROM: City Manager <br /> SUBJECT : GREAT WESTERN RECLAMATION CONTRACT <br /> Accompanying this memo are communications from Mr. Tom Blackman, <br /> President of Great Western Reclamation, Inc. I am sure you are aware <br /> that they recently settled a union bargaining contract which very <br /> materially increases the operating costs of Great Western as well <br /> as most of the other major contractors for city refuse collection in <br /> Orange County. You will also know that Mr. Blackman has asked for <br /> a rather large number of amendments to his existing contract to the <br /> point that in my opinion it would be impossible for us to even comment <br /> upon, let alone make recommendations upon, all of these items by this <br /> Council meeting. <br /> We have, however, made a rather extensive check on his unit increases <br /> in costs as well as kept in close communication with the other major <br /> affected cities . It is my strong opinion that equity of treatment of <br /> the contractor will demand that he obtain at least a 15per month in- <br /> crease per water meter. I do not declare this to be a final figure, <br /> and certainly we have no recommendations on the many other items in <br /> question; neither does Mr. Blackman accept the 15 figure as from his <br /> position an adequate one to compensate him for his increased costs . <br /> However, his contract was retroactive to the 1st of May, and unless he <br /> gets some temporary relief, he will be operating at a serious loss <br /> disadvantage. It is for this reason that we are recommending that the <br /> Council authorize the 15c figure over and above his present payment <br /> rate to be effective during the months of June and July during which <br /> time we will undoubtedly complete our studies of the matter and. will <br /> be ina position to recommend to the City Council answers to Mr. Black- <br /> man' s request for consideration of changes in his contract as well as <br /> make recommendations to the Council as to what we believe to be to the <br /> best interest of the City. <br /> ge7117 rk 11 in !nl <br /> (/ /.a cJc Fes. ane � �r _ Jz e <br /> Carl J. Thornton Com` <br /> City Manager <br /> ms \ i ec � Q (37l, ititzt <br /> Attachments 49 2 f/!7! --f_e'-e-R-' e O <br /> DA ' ' (QS cd2. <br /> CLERK OF THE cou.N9,.9t.. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.